report on the investigation of cancer incidence in ......chemical company confirmed the presence of...

REPORT ON THE

INVESTIGATION OF CANCER INCIDENCE IN MUNICIPALITIES ADJACENT TO THE

STEPAN CHEMICAL COMPANY/MAYWOOD INTERIM STORAGE SITE IN MAYWOOD, BERGEN COUNTY, NEW jS

NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH DIVISION OP OCCUPATION H^S

HEALTH

JULY 1987

MAYW00D, BERGEN COUNTY, NEW JERSEY

SUMMARY

At the request of a concerned Maywood resident ^»™*™* and Environmental Health, New Jersey Department of

wmw in the area when compared to the State of New Jersey

extensive.

uhne the orieinal request for this investigation centered on the

mmmmmm surrounding communities were exposed to radiological or non r

contaminants, if any occurred, or when these exposures began.

Site and in the surrounding communities

I. INTRODUCTION

The Environmental Disease Prevention Program of the New Jersey Department of Health received a request in November, 1985 to determine if

an excess incidence of cancer in Maywood, Bergen County, was associated

with the Stepan Chemical/Maywood Interim Storage Site [SC/MISS], an 11.2 acre hazardous waste storage site juxtaposed with the borders of three

densely populated municipalities. A search of the death certificates from 1978 through 1983 in the Borough of Maywood by a local resident revealed that of the 485 recorded deaths, 136 had cancer as the primary or secondary cause of death. This report describes an investigation into whether systematically collected cancer incidence data indicates any excess of that group of diseases in the municipalities adjacent to the SC/MISS when compared with the rest of New Jersey.

Background information on the SC/MISS and contaminants is provided for historical purposes. This report is not a risk assessment of the site. It only attempts to address the residents' concerns regarding cancer by utilizing existing cancer surveillence data.

II. BACKGROUND

Maywood Chemical Works was founded at the site in 1895. Thorium processing occurred from 1916 through 1957 using monazite ore (12% thorium and 1% uranium) and thorium-phosphorus. The wastes which were generated consisted mainly of a slurry of thorium-phosphorus which was stored off-site in unlined lagoons west of the property (now Ballod Property) (See Figure 1). In 1959, after termination of the processing of monazite ore for the manufacture of lantern mantles, the Maywood Chemical Works property was purchased by the Stepan Chemical Company. Stephan Chemical Company currently produces detergents, alkaloids, essential oils and lithiated compounds.

Site inspections conducted by the Atomic Energy Commission [AEC] between 1957 and 1963 identified the presence of thorium waste piles in several areas within the boundaries of the property. Between 1966 and 1968, approximately 17,000 cubic yards [cu. yd.] of thorium waste were consolidated and stored in the southern portion of the property. Additional radiation contamination at the northeast corner of the property was brought to the attention of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission [NRCl in late 1980. A summary of on-site radiation contamination is presented in Table 1-A.

The extent of offsite contamination was determined in 1981 by an aerial radiological survey of the four square miles surrounding the property Elevated radiation levels in commercial (immediately south and west of the property) and residential properties (0.5 miles northeast and south of the

property) were identified. Chemical contamination of on-site surface water and sediment was confirmed in 1981.

In 1982 and 1983, the Stepan Chemical Company site was placed on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's [EPA] National Priority List and added to the U.S. Department of Energy's [DOE] Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program [FUSRAP], respectively.

The DEP confirmed elevated alpha-radiation contamination in a Lodi

municipal well. This finding precipitated radiological surveys of adjoining commercial and residential properties in Rochelle Park and in

Lodi by DEP and DOE. Also in 1983, the MISS was lined with clay and

covered with a Hypalon tarp.

The present Maywood Interim Storage Site [MISS] was prepared in 1984

by Bechtel National, Inc. (DOE's management contractor under FUSRAP) to include 4700 cubic yards of excavated thorium contaminated soil from eight Maywood residential properties, nine Rochelle Park residential properties,

and part of the Ballod property. In 1985, the DOE designated thorium

contaminated properties In Lodi as part of the Maywood FUSRAP. Eight Lodi

residential properties and additional material from the Ballod property

were remediated and stored at the MISS. The remediation basis for these properties were the clean-up standards for radium contaminated soil, radon progeny, and gamma radiation at all inactive DOE uranium processing sites were promulgated by EPA in 40CFR192. In addition, the DOE developed clean-up standards for radionuclides such as thorium which were not

addressed by 40CFR192. (See Appendix A for a listing of standards.)

Water samples taken from the 15 monitoring wells around the MISS (Figure 2) indicate the presence of non-radiological, chemical contaminants

(Table 1-B). Furthermore, analyses of water samples collected from Lodi municipal wells and of soil samples from properties adjacent to the Stepan Chemical Company confirmed the presence of chemical contamination.

Presently, the data are not sufficient to allow an assessment of the relationship between the chemical contamination of the Stepan Chemical Company and the Lodi wells. The DEP has requested information from all nearby property owners in an attempt to identify the source of chemical

contaminants of the Lodi municipal wells.

III. PRESENT STATUS

To date, DOE has completed remediation of 25 residential properties in

Maywood, Rochelle Park and Lodi as well as one commercial property in Rochelle Park. Additional properties in Lodi are being evaluated, however none have been remediated since the MISS is not available for the storage

of contaminants removed from additional Lodi properties.

Long term plans for the MISS (Figure 3) by DOE include maintaining the

site in a safe and secure manner, monitoring the site for compliance with radiological standards, and the identification of a suitable permanant

radiologically safe disposal site with final disposal.

Estimates of the total radiological contamination (262,200 cu. yd.)

include 34,900 cu. yd. from prior remediations in 1984 and 1985, 81,000 cu. yd. from future adjacent remediation, 73,000 cu. yd. below-grade on the

site, 14,000 cu. yd. from a leachate collection system, 20,000 cu. yd. beneath Route 17. and 40,000 cu. yd. in AEC licensed burial areas on the

Stepan property ' .

IV. METHODS

The municipalities included in this analysis are Maywood, Lodi,

Rochelle Park and Saddle Brook (See Figure 4). Since an analysis of health

data on the total population of any one of these municipalities could

possibly mask an effect, through dilution, which may otherwise be observed

in only those living nearest to the SC/MISS, an additional analysis was

performed on a subpopulation of these municipalities closest to the site,

using selected U.S. Census block groups. Our purpose was to evaluate

whether the number of cancer cases which have been reported to the New

Jersey Cancer Registry from these areas constitute an unusual occurrence.

Since October 1, 1978, every new cancer diagnosis in New Jersey is

required by law to be reported to the New Jersey Department of Health

Cancer Registry. The reporting had been completed for the years 1979

through 1983 at the time that this analysis was initiated. The Cancer

Registry provided a listing of all cancer cases diagnosed in the four

municipalities for these years. This listing was edited for duplication of

records. The area within one mile of the boundaries of the site was

identified for a concentrated analysis. This was refined to coincide with

census block groups (Figure 3), for which the demographic variables of sex

and age distribution were available. The U.S. Census DIME file for the New

York SMSA was obtained and searched to obtain a listing of address ranges

which correspond to the census blocks which are within this one mile

radius. Cases from the Registry listing were then located by tract and

block, either via the DIME file listing or manually.

A Standardized Incidence Ratio [SIR] by primary cancer site was

calculated for each of the four municipalities as well as for the selected

block groups for each sex. The observed number of cancers was compared to

the number which one would expect to occur under the presumption that

incidence rates in the State of New Jersey for 1982 would prevail in this

population. (The year 1982 was chosen from the five years of available

incidence data for New Jersey, 1979 - 1983, since published cancer rates

were available.)

In addition, a Proportional Incidence Ratio [PIR] analysis was

performed on some specific cancers. The PIR and a test of statistical

significance were calculated whenever the SIR for a cancer type or group of

related types was elevated. The additional PIR analysis was performed to

test if an excess of some specific cancer types were not masked by a

generalized underreporting of all cancers.

V. RESULTS

This investigation was conducted because of the suspicion that there

was an elevated incidence of cancer in a neighborhood in Maywood adjacent

to the MISS, based on death certificates and a door-to-door survey

performed by a resident of Maywood. The resident's cancer mortality list

was checked against the Cancer Registry. Of the 136 names on the list,

only 41 (30%) were found in the Registry. This is probably due to

diagnoses prior to 1979 or diagnoses out of state. No additional analysis

was performed using the mortality data.

A description of the cancers diagnosed between 1979 and 1983 is

presented in Tables 2-A through 2-E. Fifty-three percent of the cases were

female. The race was reported to be white non-Hispanic for 98.4% of the

cases, 0.3% were black, 0.2% were of Hispanic origin, and 0.5% reported

"other" for race. Race was not reported for 0.6% of the cases.

Tables 3-A through 3-E present the findings for the five years of data

which were analyzed. The observed number of cancer cases was not found to

be significantly (p-0.05) greater than the expected number of cases. The

following sub-categories were found to be significantly lower than the

expected number of cases:

Maywood-all sites female

Rochelle Park-all sites male

Rochelle Park-all sites female

Rochelle Park-breast

Rochelle Park-prostate

Selected census blocks-all sites female.

When the four towns are examined for common patterns of incidence,

three of the four (Maywood, Lodi and Saddle Brook) and the selected census

blocks were found to have a SIR greater than 1.0 for male brain and other

central nervous system cancers. Also, three of the four (Maywood, Rochelle Park and Saddle Brook) and the selected census blocks had a SIR greater

than 1.0 for female brain and other central nervous system cancers.

However, in none of these analyses was the excess statistically

significant. When the four towns were combined for analysis, the observed

number of cancers was still greater than the expected number [SIR-1.5 (95%

Confidence Interval 0.8-2.6) for males and SIR-1.2 (0.6-2.1) for females], however the.difference was still not statistically significant. Also, all

four towns and the selected census blocks had a SIR less than 1.0 for

prostate cancer which was not statistically significant.

The results of the Proportional Incidence Ratio analysis (Table 4-A) is

unremarkable with the exception of cancers of the lower digestive tract in

females -- colon, and rectum and anus (Table 4-B).

VI. DISCUSSION

Many types of cancer have been linked to external gamma radiation,

which can penetrate all organs of the body. Because leukemia often has a

shorter latency period than other cancers following exposure, it is often evaluated first in situations where gamma radiation exposure is of concern.

In the area with the greatest suspected exposure, the selected block groups, there were no cases of childhood leukemia. Moreover, the analyses

indicate that when the incidence of cancer in the individual municipalities

of Maywood, Lodi, Rochelle Park and Saddle Brook are compared to the State

of New Jersey, an excess is not found.

When many observations on subgroups are made, there is an increasing

chance that one or more of the observed values will depart from the

expected number to a "statistically significant" degree purely by chance

alone. While a slight excess of brain and central nervous system cancers

was found by SIR in both males and females, it was not consistent by

municipality and the excess was not statistically significant. The degree

of excess in female digestive tract cancers by PIR analysis is of marginal

statistical significance. There is no a priori reason to suspect an

increase for these types of cancer. Dietary and other personal exposures

contribute to the the risks of colon, rectal, and anal cancers and these

types of cancers have not been found to be especially associated with

radiation.

VII. CONCLUSION

The analyses of cancer registry data for the four municipalities and

block groups juxtaposed with the SC/MISS do not provide evidence for

elevated cancer incidences in this area when compared to the State of New

Jersey. The high mortality rate calculated for this area by a Maywood

resident reflects cancer deaths (old and new cases over a time period of 6

years - 1978 through 1983). This mortality rate also reflects duration of

disease (survival) over the specified time period. Incidence is a direct

measure of the number of new cases of a disease in a period of time.

Although experimental and epidemiologic data indicate that no amount of

radiation exposure is entirely free of risk, it is improbable that any

excess cancer could be detected in the examined populations due to the

limitations of the analyses. These include small sample size and, because of the absence of exposure assessment information, the inability to

properly define exposed and non-exposed populations. However, the absence

of significantly elevated cancer incidence rates in the four communities is somewhat reassuring since 60 years (representing the total period from the

beginning of thorium processing) is sufficient time for the manifestation

of cancer in the four communities and/or block groups, if off-site radiation exposure were extensive.

It must be noted that this investigation is not definitive. It does

not provide a final answer to the other questions raised concerning adverse

health endpoints in these four communities that may be potentially

attributable to the SC/MISS. Other potential adverse health outcomes, such

as birth defects and other adverse reproductive outcomes, have not been investigated. However, the absence of adequate population exposure data

and the limitations inherent in evaluating adverse reproductive outcomes, particularly in a small population does not suggest that such an investigation would be meaningful.

In examining the occurrence of the cancers reported, it is important to no.te that cancer is, unfortunately, a common disease and that cancer is not

a single disease, but many different diseases which have many different causes. Because of the variety of cancers reported and the time span for

dates of diagnosis, it is difficult to suspect a single causative agent. It is more likely that individual risk factors such as smoking, diet or occupational exposures played a greater role in the development of the

diseases rather than the shared, common environment of the area adjacent to the Stepan Chemical Company/Maywood Interim Storage Site.

TABLE 1-A

Summary of 1984 and 1985 On-site Sampling Data from

Bechtel National, Inc.

SURFACE WATER

Total Uranium

Radium-226

Thorium-232

GROUND WATER

Total Uranium

Radium-226

Thorium-232

SEDIMENT

RADON

Concentrations (pCi/L)

1984

3.0 - 11

<0.1 - 1.8

<0.1 - 0.8

1985

<3.0

<0.1 - 1.0

<0.1 - <0.3

Concentrations (pCi/L)

1984

Concentrations (pCi/g)

Standard*

600

100

50

Weighted Average Concentrations (pCi/L)

EXTERNAL GAMMA DOSE RATES

Dose Rate (mrem/yr)

1984

Background (offsite) 80

Fenceline ** 90-763

On-site ** 79-91

* Standards are available in Bechtel 1984 and 1985 reports.

** Measured background of 9 uR/hr (1984) and 12 uR/hr (1985) have been

subtracted. Dose rate is based on continuous occupancy throughout

the year.

CONCENTRATIONS OK CHEN1CAL CONTAMINANTS IN (JROUNDWATER AT THE HISS. 19B51

P«ruftst«r/ORlt IB Range of ConcantrttiiHn by

3A ' ~~ Lo"tlon_ijjon_itorint Well Ho|?

Hethylene chloride (ug/1)

Triehloroethylene (us/1) Bii (2-ethylheiyl) phthalate <ug/l)

Chloroform (ug/1)

Toluene (ug/1)

Di-n-octyl phthalate (ug/1) Benzene (us/1)

Tetrachloroethylene (ug/1) Trans-],2-Dicnloro-

•thylens (ug/1)

l.],?,2-Tetract>loro-ethane (ug/1)

Vinyl Chloride lug/I) Total organic carbon (sg/1)

Total organic hallde (ug/1)

Specific conductance (umhoa/cn) pH (pH units)

Arsenic4 (ag/1) Barium4 (ag/l) Boron4 (ag/1) Calciun4 (ng/1) Chroaiun4 (ng/1) Iron4 (ng/1) Lead4 (ng/1) ItagneaJun4 (ng/1)

Manganese4 (ng/1) Potassium4 (ng/1) Silicon4 (ng/l) Sodiun4 (ng/1)

Strontium4 (ag/1) Tin4 (tng/1)

Vanadium4 (ng/1) Zinc4 (ng/1)

108

66

44/190

ND

Nt> NO

ND

ND/130

ND/7

ND

ND

2/100

99/572

724/937

6.9/7.4

MD

0.05

ND

85

ND

0.03

ND

550

26

42

3

74

0.12

0.05

ND

NO

1087

24/350

39

38

4J

ND

ND/110

ND

ND

ND

21/305

78/841

7007/7683

6.8/7.3

0.6

0.07

220

7.?

3.8

0.04

12

0.58

57

19

2800

0.57

MD

3.2

ND

169

NO

ND/S3

ND

ND

27

143/150

HO/30

HD

ND

ND

IS/130

182/1J32

74bO/)0130

6.8/7.3

MD

ND

?.?

300

ND

O.OS

NO

100

0.42

J<H>

8

2800

0.38

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND/110

ND

33

ND

ND

42/90

ND

ND

ND

2/16S

S8/381

/63/12I0

3-9/S.6

ND

3.i

0.1

6b

ND

2.7

MO

IS

1.9

78

14

3S

ND

ND

ND

0.04

267

ND

S4/7S

ND

31

ND

ND

ND/2S

ND

ND

ND

6/70

S1/S53

2SSS/3S3O

S.9/6.3

ND

0.007

0.3

?uo

ND

NO

ND

S3

IS

89

S.8

320

0.3

ND

ND

0.0?

6B

30?

ND

12/29

ND

20/SS

ND

420/1240

NO/1/0

1100/2964

13

NO/220

18/79

498/146S

1222/1780

6.3//.l

ND

0.03

0.13

ISO

ND

ND

ND

IS

3.4

S3

7.S

190

0.21

ND

ND

NO

ND

ND

29

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

33

113

2428

S.46

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

100

ND

120/1700

ND

ND

ND

ND/660

ND/33

ND

ND

ND

17/30

74/216

32S8/337S

6.7/6.9

MD

0.03

1.0

190

ND

ND

ND

7.9

0.1

310

86

290

0.45

ND

ND

ND

17*

ND

57/61

31

25

ND

ND

ND/26

ND

ND

ND

10/78

58/140

1879/3000

6.9/7.3

ND

0.06

1?

190

ND

0.07

ND

45

0.29

110

7B

65

1.5

ND

ND

1.0

145

ND

ND/290

NO

26

ND

ND

ND/100

ND

ND

ND

10/23

100/220

7887/4185

9.0/9.5

NO

0.08

0. 7

20

MD

2.7

ND

10

0.23

52

48

8/0

0.1?

ND

ND

0.03

517

ND/9

NO/36

16

NO

NO//

NO/110

nd/i;

NlJ

MD

12/6?

80/164

5542/745U

I. 1//.5

ND

0.007

15

220

ND

0.05

ND

73

0.8

190

J5

1800

0.25

NO

ND

ND

:"i^jr:ro':io::crt.b;!:r.i:-:;.r.r:^r:ti.:f..':;;^-1 ~~ -—• —•»•• *• ™. -Analyzed for dissolved metal.

MISS Annual Site

Environmental Report - 1983

Bechtel National, Inc. May, *''

CHEHICAL CONTAMINANTS FOR WERE BELOW THE

" "" LIHIT OF

Acrolein Acrylonitnle Bromodi chloromethane

Bromoforro Brorooroethane

Carbon Tetrachloride Chlorobenzene

Chlorodibromoraethane

Chloroethane . 2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether Chloromethane Dichlorodifluoromethane

1 1-Dichloroethane 1,2-Dichloroethane 1,1-Dichloroethylene

1-2-Dichloropropane

1,3-Dichloropropene

Ethylbenzene 1.1,1-Trichloroethane

l!l.2-Trichloroethane Trichlorofluorornethane

Acenaphthene

Acenaphthylene

Benzo (a) anthracene Benzo (b) fluoranthene Benzo (k) fluoranthene Benzo (a) pyrene Benzo U.b.i) perylene

BisZ(2-chloroethyl) ether Bis (2-chloroethoiy) methane Bis (2-chloroisopropyl) ether A-Bromophenylphenylether

Butylbenzylphthalate

2-Chloronaphthalene 4-Chlorophenylphenylether

Chrysene

Dibenzo (a.h) anthracene DiButyl phthalate 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 1,3-Dichlorobenzene

1,4-Dichlorobenzene

S^'Dichlorobenzid

Diethylphthalate Dimethyiphthalate 2.4-Dinitrotoluene 2.6-Dinitrotoluene.

1,2-Diphenylhydrazine

Fluoranthene

Fluorene Hexachlorobenzene

Hexachlorobutadiene

Hexachloroethane Hexachlorocyclopentadiene

Indeno (1.2.3-cd) pyrene Isophorone

Naphthalene

Nitrobenzene n-Ni trosodimethylaintne, n-Nitrosodi-N-propylamine n-Nitrosodiphenylamine

Phenanthrene

Pvrene 12 4-Trichlorobenzene 2 3 7 8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin

4-Cnloro-3-methylphenol

2-Chlorophenol 2.4-Dichlorophenol 2,4-Dimethylphenol 2,4-Dinitrophenol . 2-Methyl-4-6-dimtrophenol

2-Nitrophenol 4-Nitrophenol Pentachlorophenol

2.4,6-TrUhlorophenol

Aldrin BHC, alpha BHC. beta BHC, Ranuna

BHC, delta Chlordane

Dieldrin Endosulfan, alpha Endosulfan. beta EndosulTan sulfate

Endrin Endrifi aldehyde Heptachlor Heptachlor Epoxide

4,4*-DDT 4,4>-DDE 4,4'-DDD

PCB 1016 PCB 1221 PCB 1232 PCB 1242 PCB 1248 PCB 1254 PCB 1260 Toxaphene

Antimony Beryllium Cadmium Cobalt Copper Holybedenum

Nickel Scandium Selenium

Silver Thallium

i

tad

n o 9

■Analysis for these p.rameters required to meet NJDEP permit requirements

TABLE 2-A

Description of Reported Cancer Cases

MAYWOOD - BERGEN COUNTY

Primary

Site

Range of

Age at

Diagnosis

Sex

M F

Total

Total 15 - 93 120 91 211

TABLE 2-B


LODI - BERGEN COUNTY

Range of

Primary Age at Sex Total

Site ' Diagnosis M F

Total 2 - 98 254 277 531

TABLE 2-C


SADDLE BROOK - BERGEN COUNTY

Primary

Site

Range of

Age at

Diagnosis

Sex

M F

Total

Buccal Cavity & Pharynx 9-74 7 3

Digestive System 46 - 90 46 35

Respiratory System 44 - 81 39 13

Bones & Joints 68 0 1

Soft Tissue 1-54 0 2

Skin (Excluding Basal Cell) 31-86 9 5

Breast 30-92 0 52

Female Genital Organs 14-84 0 31

Male Genital Organs 35 - 86 19 0

Urinary System 37 - 92 16 5

Eye - 0 0

Brain & Other Nervous System 41-87 4 4

Endocrine System 17-70 3 3

Lymphomas 19-76 6 3

Multiple Myeloma 48-69 2 0

Leukemias 27-70 3 2

Miscellaneous

Reticuloendothelial 51 0 1

Other Ill-defined Sites 55 0 1

Unknown Primary Site 52-74 4 1

Total 1 - 92 158 162

10

81

52

1

2

14

52

31

19

21

0

8

6

9

2

5

1

1

5

320

TABLE 2-D


ROCHELLE PARK - BERGEN COUNTY

Primary

Site

Range of

Age at

Diagnosis

Sex

M F

Total

Total 3 - 94 88 75 163

TABLE 2-E


Selected Census Blocks Surrounding

Maywood Radiation Site

Range of

Primary Age at Sex Total

Site Diagnosis M F

Total 14 - 94 128 100 228

TABLE 3-A

Comparison of Observed and Expected

Cancers 1979 - 1983

Mayvood - Bergen County

1980 U.S. Census Population: Male 4715, Female 5180.

1 SIR - Standardized Incidence Ratio of Observed to Expected number of

Cancers (Age Standardized).

2 Approximately 5 percent of the SIR fall outside these limits.

If 1.00 is included within this Confidence Interval, there is not a

statistically significant departure of observed cancer incidence from

State incidence rates.

TABLE 3-B


Cancers 1979 - 1983

Lodl - Bergen County








TABLE 3-C


Cancers 1979 - 1983

Saddle Brook - Bergen County

Sex - Type Observed Expected SIR 95% CI

for SIR

157.2

167.1

16.6

33.3

44.5

21.2

16.9

15.5

5.9

5.5

3.0

2.2

12.2

13.3

5.1

7.9

6.8

4.6

2.9

3.8

4.2

2.2

2.1

4.2

0.5

1980 U.S. Census Population: Hale 6769, Female 7315.


Cancers (Age Standardized) .





TABLE 3-D


Cancers 1979 - 1983

Rochelle Park - Bergen County

1980 U.S. Census Population: Hale 2616, Female 2987,







TABLE 3-E


Cancers 1979 - 1983

' Selected Census Blocks Surrounding

Haywood Radiation Site








TABLE 4-A

PROPORTIONAL INCIDENCE RATIOS

CANCER INCIDENCE IN SELECTED BLOCK GROUPS

COMPARED TO NEW JERSEY

POISSON

PIR P

1.1 0.3

1.5 0.09

1.7 0.1

1.3 0.4

0.6 0.5

2.0 0.04

1.6 0.2

2.0 0.1

1.4 0.3

1.2 0.5

2.2 0.2

1.3 0.4

0.9 0.5

1.6 0.02

COMPARED TO THE COMBINED INCIDENCE IN

MAYWOOD, LODI, ROCHELLE PARK, AND SADDLE BROOK

Male Lung 29 28.0 1.0 0.5

Female Colon 17 14.0 1.2 0.2

Male Lympfaoma 7 4.3 1.6 0.1

Male Leukemia 3 1.7 1.8 0.2

Female Leukemia 1 1.8 0.6 0.5

Female Rectum & Anus 9 4.0 2.3 0.02

Male Stomach 6 3.4 1.8 0.1

Female Stomach 4 2.3 1.8 0.2

Male Pancreas 4 3.7 1.1 0.5

Male Brain & CNS 2 2.5 0.8 0^5 Female Brain & CNS 3 1.9 1.5 0.3

Male Kidney & Urinary 4 3.3 1.2 0.4

Male Prostate' 18 16.7 1.1 0.4

Female Colon, Rectum

& Anus Combined 26 18.0 1.4 0.05

TABLE 4-B

PROPORTIONAL INCIDENCE RATIO

FOR COLON, RECTAL AND ANAL CANCERS

AMONG FEMALES IN THE SELECTED BLOCK GROUPS

OBSERVED/EXPECTED RATIO (POISSON p)

STANDARDIZED INCIDENCE RATIO

FOR COLON,- RECTAL, AND ANAL CANCERS COMBINED

AMONG FEMALES IN THE SELECTED BLOCK GROUPS

BLOCK GROUPS

vs N.J.

OBSERVED EXPECTED

27 21.1

OBSERVED/

EXPECTED

RATIO

1.3

95%

CONFIDENCE

INTERVAL

(0.8 - 1.9)

S861

iSiOl -nl

SE!J.H5cGcd

aIIUIDIA QNV HJ.IS =SVcOiS Wlfc'aJLNI QOOMAVW I BdHDld

// II

//1 '!_

'//'A

Ss-!3

CisSiSss CN-t mccvs

511S 3OTBO1S

VNI«31.MI

sC D

NCSI.'.TC! ~7l'. ^

ILJL-\,

1 WESTERLEY Y" BROOK

NEW SITE BOUNDARY AS

OF SEPTEMBER 19B5


OF SEPTEMBER 198S

© SHALLOW MONITORING WELL

® BEDROCK MONITORING WELL

a. SURFACE WATER ANt SEDIMENT m SAMPLING LOCATION

• FENCE LINE

q TERRADEX TRACK-ETCH

& TLO LOCATIONS

DRAWING NOT TO SCALE

NOTE: MONITORING LOCATIONS RETAINED ON FORMER SITE BOUNDARY TO PROVIDE FOR CONSISTENCY OF DATA SOURCES.

FIGURE 2

Radon and External Gamma Radiation

SURFACE WATER, GROUNDWATER, AND SEDIMENT

SAMPLING LOCATIONS AT THE MISS

HISS Annual Site Environmental Report •

Calendar Year 1985, Bechtel Mational, Inc.

May, 1986.


OF SEPTEMBER 1985

—*— FENCE LINE

BURIAL

SITE NO

IBENEATH

EXISTING

WAREHOUSE) S If ■'

"II BURIAL S //SITE NO 1

BURIAL

SITE NO 2

CONTAMINATED

AREA


OF SEPTEMBER 1985

BALLOD PROPERTY

FIGURE 3 BURIAL SITE LOCATIONS ON THE STEPAN COMPANY PROPERTY

HISS Annual Site Environmental Report •

Calendar Year 1985, Bechtel National, In. May, 1986.

FIGURE 4

MAYWOOD INTERIM THORIUM STORAGE SITE

SURROUNDING MUNICIPALITIES

AND SELECTED U.S. CENSUS BLOCK GROUPS

ROCHELLE PAR MAYWOOD

200's

T 500 /t 332 SADDLE BROOK

all / all

LEGEND

T 500 - CENSUS TRACT

100 «S - BLOCK GROUP »«

*Blocks 403-407

432-434

MAYWOOD INTERIM

STORAGE SITE

0 .1 .8 .3 -4 .5 Jh

APPENDIX A

STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR PROTECTION

AGAINST RADIATION FOR RADIUM CONTAMINATION

MODE OF EXPOSURE EXPOSURE CONDITION VALUE CITATION

Whole Body Dose To Radiation Workers 5,000 mrem/yr

To Individuals in the

General Population

To Large or Critical

Population

To General Population

500 mrem/yr

170 mrem/yr

100 mrem/yr

10 CFR 20.101

NJAC 7:28-6.1

ICRP 26 (104)

NCRP 39 (229)

Proposed 10 CFR 20

10 CFR 20.105

NJAC 7:28-6.2

ICRP 26 (119)

NCRP 39 (245)

NCRP 77 (10.2)

Proposed 10 CFR 20

FRC 1

NCRP 39 (250)

NRC TECH

ICRP 26 (121)

NCRP 77 (10.2)

DOE Memo

Proposed 10 CFR 20

External Gamma

Radiation

Indoor Gamma Radiation

Level (above background)

20 uR/hr

10 uR/hr

40 CFR 192.12

RAC

Radon/Radon

Progeny

Maximum Permissible

Concentration in

Controlled Areas

Maximum Permissible

Concentration in

Unrestricted Areas

Annual Average Radon

Progeny Concentration

(including background)


Concentration (excluding

background) for

Residential Properties


Progeny Concentration

(excluding background)

for Commercial Properties

30 pCi/L

(4 WLM/yr)

30 pCi/L

3 pCi/L

(0.4 WLM/yr)

1 pCi/L

0.02 WL

0.01 WL

0.03 WL

10 CFR 20 App. B

NJAC 7:28-6.5

10 CFR 20 App. B

DOE Memo

NJAC 7:28-6.5

40 CFR 192.12

DOE Memo

Grand Junction

Grand Junction


Radionuclides

in Air

Maximum Permissible

Concentration in

Controlled Areas

(sol + insol)

Ra-226

Nat-U

Th-230

Maximum Permissible

Concentration in

Unrestricted Areas

(sol + insol)

Ra-226

Nat-U

Th-230

0.08 pCi/L

0.13 pCi/L

0.012 pCi/L

10 CFR 20 App. B

NJAC 7:28-6.5

10 CFR 20 App. B

NJAC 7:28-6.5

0.005 pCi/L

0.005 pCi/L

0.00038 pCi/L

Radionuclides

in Water

Maximum Permissible

Concentration in

Controlled Areas (sol)

Ra-226

Nat-U

Th-230

Maximum Permissible

Concentration in

Unrestricted Areas (sol)

Ra-226

Nat-U

Th-230

Maximum Contaminant Level

for Drinking Water

Total Radium

Gross Alpha (excluding

radon and uranium)

Gross Beta

400 pCi/L

1,000,000 pCi/L

(20,000)

50,000 pCi/L

30 pCi/L

30,000 pCi/L

(600)

2,000 pCi/L

5 pCi/L

15 pCi/L

50 pCi/L

10 CFR 20, NJAC 7:28

10 CFR 20,

(NJAC 7:28)

10 CFR 20, NJAC 7:28

10 CFR 20

NJAC 7:28, DOE Memo

10 CFR 20

(NJAC 7:28, DOE Memo)

10 CFR 20,

NJAC 7:28, DOE Memo

40 CFR 141.26

NJAC 7:10-5


Radionuclides in Solids

* Soil

Contamination

Restricted Land Use,

Covenants on Deeds,

No Excavation,

No Structures,

No Agriculture

Ra-226 100 pCi/g

Restricted Land Use,

Covenants on Deeds,

No Residential Structures

Ra-226 20 pCi/g

Unrestricted Use,

Concentrataion Average Over

100 Square Meters

Ra-226, First

15 cm Layer 5 pCi/g

Ra-226, Subsequent

15 cm Layer 15 pCi/g

U-238 40 pCi/g

U-238 150 pCi/g

Co-60 10 pCi/g

NRC TECH

NRC TECH

40 CFR 192.12, NRC TECH

40 CFR 192.12, NRC TECH

DOE/NJ

DOE Memo

RAC

* Alpha Surface

Contamination

Ra-226, Total

Ra-226, Removable

Nat-Th, Total

Nat-Th, Removable

Nat-U, Total

Nat-U, Removable

100 dpm/100 cm NRC Guidelines

2 20 dpm/100 cm ANSI N13.12

2 1,000 dpm/100 cm_ NRC Guidelines

200 dpm/100 cm ANSI N13.12

o

5,000 dpm/100 cm NRC Guidelines 2

1,000 dpm/100 cm ANSI N13.12

Ctcations

10 CFR 20

40 CFR 141

40 CFR 192

ANSI N13.12

DOE Memo

DOE/NJ

FRC I

Grand Junction

ICRP 26

NCRP 39

NCRP 77

NJAC 7:10-5

NJAC 7:28:

Standards for Protection Against Radiation, U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission, November 1960 as amended, Standards,

Natural Tnterim Primary Drinking Water Regulations. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, July 1976, Standards.

Health and Environmental Protection, Standards for Uranium and Thorium Mill Tailings, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, January 1983, Standards.

Control of Radioactive Surface Contamination of Materials, Equipment and Facilities to be Released for Uncontrolled

Use, American National Standards Institute, August 1981 Draft Standards.

Radiation Standards for Protection of the Public in the Vicinity of DOE Facilities. U.S. Department of Energy memorandum, August 1985, Standards.

Decontamination Criteria for the Former Kellex Site~ (Pierpont Property) Remedial Action, Jersey City, New

Jersey, U.S. Department of Energv, June 1980, Standards.

Background Material for the Development of Radiation Protection Standards, Report No. 1, Federal Radiation

Council, 1960, Recommendations.

Grand Junction Remedial Action Criteria, U.S. Surgeon

General, December 1972, 37 FR 25918, Standards.

Recommendations of the International Commission on

Radiological Protection, Report No. 26, January 1977

Recommendations.

Basic Radiation Protection Criteria, Natural Council on

Radiation Protection and Measurements, January 1971

Recommendations.

Exposures from the Uranium Series with Emphasis on Radon and

its Daughters, National Council on Radiation Protection and

Measurements, March 1984, Recommendations.

\ New Jersey State Primary Drinking Water Regulations, New

Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, 1979 Standards.

New Jersey Radiation Protection Code, New Jersey Department

of Environmental Protection, September 1969 as amended Standards.

Citations

NRC Guidelines

NRC TECH

Decontamination of Facilities and Equipment Prior to Release

for Unrestricted Use or Termination of Licenses for ' Byproduct, Source, or Special Nuclear Materials, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, July 1982, Guidelines.

Disposal or Onsite Storage of Residual" Thorium or Uranium

from Post Operations, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Branch Technical Position, October 1981, Guidelines.

Proposed 10 CFR 20 Standards for Protection Against Radiation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1986, Proposed Rulemaking.

RAC A Pathway Analysis Approach for Determining Acceptable Levels of Contamination from Cobalt-60 in Soil at the

International Nutronics Irradiation Facility. Till, John E.

and Robert E. Moore, Radiological Assessment Corp., Report No. 7/85, August 1985.

R3/001

APPENDIX B

GAMMA RADIATION CONTAMINATION AND HEALTH EFFECTS

The identification of contaminants at the site is complete, and the

available data indicate the presence of monazite ore (12% thorium and 1%

uranium) wastes which contains mainly radium.- These radioactive elements

decay and emit alpha and beta particles and gamma photons in different

proportions. Gross alpha and beta contamination of monitoring wells

surrounding the property has been established through water sampling

performed by DOE and DEP. At the perimeter of the site, gamma radiation

above background levels has been measured (Table 1-A).

The alpha, beta, and gamma radiation, known collectively as "ionizing

radiation", exert their damaging effects on living tissues by interacting

directly with molecules and changing their behavior.

The human population is exposed to background levels of natural

ionizing radiation from several sources such as cosmic radiation,

terrestrial radiation, and radiation internal to the body. The population

is also exposed to man-made radiation from medicinal, occupational, and

environmental contamination sources. On the average, the annual population

whole body dose from exposure to natural radioactivity is 80 millirem

[mrem], and 40 mrem from medical sources.

Laboratory animal and epidemiologic studies have shown that ionizing

radiation can induce several types of cancer depending on the type of

radiation. In humans, exposure to high levels of gamma radiation is

associated with increased incidence of the following types of cancer:

chronic granulocytic leukemia, breast, brain, thyroid, bone, and lung.

Exposure to gamma radiation has been shown to cause genetic damage

leading to heritable mutations and congenital malformations in laboratory

organisms. With the exception of the induction of cancer among in utero

exposed children and reciprocal translocations in spermatocytes of exposed

males, epidemiologic studies have not provided conclusive evidence for a

causal relationship between exposure to ionizing radiation and heritable

mutations and congenital malformations. However, because of the well

documentation of the effects of ionizing radiation exposure on the wide

varieties of organisms in the animal and plant kingdom, one can only assume

that humans are similarly affected.

The recommended annual dose limit to an individual of a population

exposed to ionizing radiation is 500 mrem (excluding medical and natural

radiation). The DOE standard for the general public was changed from 500

mrem/yr to 100 mrem/yr above background in order to incorporate the

recommendations of the International Council on Radiation Protection and

the National Committee on Radiation Protection and Measurements.

APPENDIX C

TABLES FROM

BECHTEL NATIONAL, ING.

HISS ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING

SUMMARY 1984

TABLE 1

TOTAL URANIUM, RADIUM-226, AND THORIUM-232 CONCENTRATIONS

IN SURFACE WATER AT THE MISS, 1 984

aSampling locations shown in Figure 2. Location 4 is via a manhole and was not accessible because the cover was welded shut.

bSampling included baseline and 2nd, 3rd, and 4th quarters.

CA11 results indude background.

dIn computing the average, quarterly values that are less than the limit of sensitivity are considered as being equal to the limit of sensitivity. Average values are reported without the notation "less than."

ePercent of standard determined using quarterly samples only. Does not indude baseline sample. DOE CG for release to uncontrolled areas is 600 pCi/l for uranium 30 pCi/1 for radium-226, and 2000 pCi/J for thorium-232.

'Samples collected only when water is present during sampling period.

1 II

ro

TABLE 2

URANIUM, RADIUM-226, AND THORIUM-232 CONCENTRATIONS IN SEDIMENT AT THE MISS, 198V

There are no specific limits for radium, thorium, or uranium in sediment. However, decontamination of MISS is being conducted to the DOE FUSR AP proposed guidelines for radionudldes in soli. For comparative purposes, these proposed guidelines are 5 pCi/g in the upper 6 in and 15 pCi/g below 6 in. for radium and thorium, and 75 pCi/g for uranium (Ref. 3). Location 3 is upstream of the MISS and represents background.

^Sampling locations shown in Figure 2.

TABLE 3

RADON CONCENTRATIONS AT THE MISS, 1 984a

Sampling Concentrations (pCj/I)c Percent of

Location1* 08/30/84-09/25/84 09/25/84-12/19/84 Average - Standard**

Radon-220

1 0.95 2 1.28 3 . l.| |

4 0.95

5 . 2.11

6— 1.44

7 0.78 8 0.62

9 1.44

10 0.78

11 4.70

12 1.83

13 f

1 «8 0.62

Sampling program was initiated in August 1984.

bSampllng locations shown in Figure 3. Location 1 3 is quality control station for Location I.

All results in dude background.

dDOE CG for radon-220 is 10 pCi/1 (annual average above background) for uncontrolled areas. DOE CG for radon-222 is 3 pCi/1 (annual average above background) for uncontrolled areas.

eA negative or zero value indicates the absence of radon-220.

OC station for Location I not installed until 09/25/84.

background station located at the Department of Health, Patterson, N3.

13

TABLE 4

EXTERNAL GAMMA EXPOSURE RATES AT THE MISS, 1 984J

Sampling

Location0

Exposure Rates (uR/h)c

08/30/84-09/26/84 09/26/84-1 2/1 9/84 Average

Bounda ry

148

aSampling program was initiated in August 1984.

^Sampling locations shown in Figure 3.

CA1I results indude background, which is approximately 9 uR/h (Ref. 5).

^Exposed 111 days: badge missing on 09/26/85, found on the ground on I 2/1 9/85.

eLocation 10 is situated in an area of known contamination.

fTLD not installed until 09/26/84.

SBackground station established at the Department of Health, Patterson, N3 on 09/19/84, but TLD not installed.

14

TABLES FROM

BECHTEL NATIONAL, ING.

MISS ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING

SUMMARY 1985

TABLE 3-1

CONCENTRATIONS OF THORON AND RADON AT THE HISS, 1985

Concentrations'* (n x IP9 uCi/ml)c

Minimum Maxinun Average

Percent of -

Standard*1 (Annual Average)

0.5

0.6

0.3

0.5 ' 3.2 .

1.0

0.3

0.02

0.2

2.7

0.2

1.2

2.9

0.1

0.3

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.2

0.2

0.3

0.2

0.4

0.2

0.2

0.3

0.4

5

6

3

5

32

10

3

0.2

2

27

2

12

29

1

10

7

10

13

17

7

7

10

7

13

7

7

10

13

aSanpling locations shown in Figure 3-1.

for Location 1.

bA11 results include background.

cHu1tip1y n (the listed concentration) by

Location 13 is quality control station

109 to obtain uCi/ml. d00E limit for thoron (radon-220) is 10 pCi/1 (annual average above background) for

uncontrolled areas. DOE limit for radon-222 is 3 pCi/1 (annual average above back

ground) for uncontrolled areas.

eNo detectable thoron (radon-220) or less than minimum detectable activity (MDA).

^Detectors missing; no data for affected sampling period.

9QC station for Location 1.

"Background monitoring station at the Department of Health, Pater son, New Jersey.

19

TABLE 3-2

EXTERNAL GAMMA DOSE RATES AT THE MISS, 1985

Sanpling

Locationa

No. of

Measurements

Dose Rate (mrem/qtr)p Percent of

Minimum Maximum Average Total mrem/yr Standard0

Boundary

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

11

12

On-Site

1

13

Background

149

4

4

4

4

25 29 27 108

27

130

272

106

15

15

38

627

57

180

48

50

46

108

a4*ip1ing locations are shown in Figure 5. Location 13 is a QC TLD for Location 1.

bNeasured background has been subtracted. Dose rate is based on continuous occupancy

throughout the year.

cThe DOE radiation protection standard is 100 mrem/yr.

location 10 is in an area of known contamination (Ref. 3).

eLocation 10 TLD missing 2nd quarter; Location 2 TLD missing 3rd quarter; Location 13 TLD missing 1st quarter.

fWhere quarterly data were not obtained for a particular sanpling location, the quarterly average for that location was used in calculating total mrem/yr.

^Background monitoring location at the Department of Health, Paterson, New Jersey.

22

TABLE 3-3

CONCENTRATIONS OF DISSOLVED TOTAL URAH1UH, RAD1UH-226,

AND THORIUH-232 IN SURFACE UATER AT THE HISS, 1985

aSanp1ing locations shown in Figure 3-2. Location 4 is accessible only by way of a manhole; no samples could be collected because the cover was welded shut.

DA11 results include background.

n (the listed concentration) by 109 to obtain uCi/mi.

dIn computing the average, quarterly values that are less than the limit of sensitivity are considered equal to the limit of sensitivity. Average values are reported without the

notation "less than (<)."

ePercent of standard determined using average of quarterly samples only.

\ 1 x 10"' uCi/ml (100 pCi/1) for

_ DOE DCG is

6 x 10' uCi/ml (600 pCi/1) for uranium in water, _ r _

radium-226 in water, and 5 x 10"® uCi/ml (50 pCi/1) for thorium-232 in water. See Appendix B for discussion of revised concentration guides.

^Samples collected only if standing water is present at the time of sampling.

25

TABLE 3-4

CONCENTRATIONS OF OISSOLVEO TOTAL URANIUM IN GROUNDUMER AT THE MISS. 1985

aSanpling locations are shown in Figure 3-2.

bA11 results include background.

cHultiply n (the listed concentration) by 109 to obtain uCi/ml.

dJn computing the average, quarterly values that are less than the limit of Sensitivity are considered equal to the limit of sensitivity. Average values are reported without the


«Percent of standard determined using the average value. The DOE DCG for uranium in water

is 6 x 10~7 uCi/ml (600 pCi/1).

fSha11ow well to monitor overburden. These wells typically do not contain water.

27

TABLE 3-5

CONCENTRATIONS OF DISSOLVED THORIUM-232 IN CROUNDWATER AT THE MISS. 1985

aSanpling locations are shown in Figure 3-2.

bHultiply n (the listed concentration) by I09 to obtain uCi/ml.

CA11 results include background.

dJn conputing the average, quarterly values that are less than the limit of sensitivity are considered equal to the limit of sensitivity. Average values are reported without the


ePercent of standard determined using the computed average value. The DOE DCG for thoriuro-232

in water is 5 x 10"8 uCi/ml (50 pCi/1).

fSha11ow well to monitor overburden. These wells typically do not contain water.

9Analysis results not available for first quarter samples.

28

TABLE 3-6

CONCENTRATIONS OF 01SSOLVED RADIUM-226 IN GROUNDUATER AT THE HISS, 1985

I

I

aSanpling* locations are shown in Figure 3-2.

DA11 results include background.

cHu1tiply n (the listed concentration) by 109 to obtain uCi/ml.

dIn computing the average, quarterly values that are less than the limit of sensitivity are considered equal to the limit of sensitivity. Average values are reported without the


Percent of standard determined using the ccnputed average value. The DOE DCG

is 1 x VT1 uCi/ml (100 pCi/1) for radium-226 in water.

fShallow well to ronitor overburden. These wells typically do not contain water.

^Analysis results not available for first quarter samples.

i

i 29

1

aThere are no specific limits for uranium in sediment.

^Sampling locations shown in Figure 3-2. Location 3 is upstream of the MISS and represents background. No sediment was available at sampling Locations 4, 5, and 6.

cTotal uranium was determined by summing concentrations of all three isotopes.

TABLE 3-8

CONCENTRATIONS OF RAD1UM-226 AND THORIUM-232 IN SEDIMENTS

AT THE MISS. 1985a

aThere are no specific limits for radium, thorium, or uranium in sediment.' However, decontamination of MISS is being conducted in

accordance with DOE FUSRAP guidelines for radionuclides

in soil. For radium and thorium, these guidelines are

5 pCi/g in the upper 15 cm (6 in.) and 15 pCi/g at depths greater than

15 cm (6 in.) (Ref. 16).

bSarapling locations shown in Figure 3-2. Location 3 is upstream of the MISS and represents background. No sediment was available at sampling Locations 4. 5. and 6.

32

«■» (-

REFERENCES

1. Maywood Interim Storage Site Environmental Monitoring Summary - Calendar

Year 1984, Bechtel National, Inc., June 1985.

2. Maywood Interim Storage Site Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar

Year 1985, Bechtel National, Inc., May 1986.

3. National Research Council Committee on the Biological Effects of

Ionizing Radiation, "The Effects on Populations of Exposure to Low

Levels of Ionizing Radiation: 1980", National Academy Press,

1980.

report on the investigation of cancer incidence in ......chemical company confirmed the presence of...

Documents